Re: Call for Consensus: CORS to Candidate Recommendation

I object to making such a change.

On 11/16/2012 02:32 PM, Glenn Adams wrote:
> Before going to CR, I believe the [HTML] entry in the references section
> needs to be changed to reference an appropriate W3C specification. A
> present, it reference a non-W3C document.
>
> On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 6:17 AM, Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@nokia.com>wrote:
>
>> On 11/15/12 5:31 PM, ext Hill, Brad wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> I have placed a draft for review at:
>>>
>>> http://www.w3.org/2011/**webappsec/cors-draft/<http://www.w3.org/2011/webappsec/cors-draft/>
>>>
>>> And this is a Call for Consensus among the WebAppSec and WebApps WGs to
>>> take this particular text (with necessary additions to the Status of this
>>> Document section if approved) forward to Candidate Recommendation.
>>>
>>>
>> I support this CfC although I am wondering about the CR exit criteria.
>>
>> Do you expect to re-use the CSP1.0 criteria:
>>
>> [[
>> The entrance criteria for this document to enter the Proposed
>> Recommendation stage is to have a minimum of two independent and
>> interoperable user agents that implementation all the features of this
>> specification, which will be determined by passing the user agent tests
>> defined in the test suite developed by the Working Group.
>> ]]
>>
>> My preference is what WebApps has used in other CRs because I think it is
>> clearer that a single implementation is not required to pass every test but
>> that at least two implementations must pass every test. F.ex.:
>>
>>     <http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/CR-**websockets-20120920/#crec<http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/CR-websockets-20120920/#crec>
>>>
>>
>> -Thanks, AB
>>
>>
>>
>>
>

Received on Friday, 16 November 2012 13:52:27 UTC